Posts Tagged ‘Standardized field sobriety tests’

« Older Entries
Newer Entries »

Intoxilyzer 8000 Is Unreliable!

January 27th, 2012

Today, in State v. Heather Reid, Case No. TRC 1100716 in the Circleville Municipal Court, Judge Gary Dumm has ruled that “The State of Ohio cannot expect this Court to find the Intoxilyzer 8000 reliable when the State refuses to address known problems and explain why those problems can be ignored.”

The Court calls for independent laboratory testing to address the issues raised by the adoption of the Intoxilyzer 8000: RFI, sample size of the chamber, volume of the sample tested, possible operator manipulation of the results, possible CMI modifications of the software without the knowledge of ODH and slope detector inadequacy.  Judge Dumm wrote, “If this testing is not done independently of CMI and ODH, all municipal courts in Ohio will be dealing with these challenges for years to come.” The Court also states, “At a time when scientific testing can readily determine the accuracy and validity of many tools and processes, it would seem that both CMI and ODH should be happy to run independent testing with known and respectable laboratories to determine the accuracy and reliability of the equipment.”

The Court does not address the looming question of whether or not ODH or CMI will have to turn over source code data.  However, the Court eviscerated ODH stating that “the less than candid answers to the questions regarding the data base, the ability of CMI to enter and alter the machine without knowledge or documentation, lack of explanation of newer versions software, missing information and unexplained inconsistent results clearly cast doubt on ODH’s transparency as to the Intoxilyzer 8000.”

DUI attorney Charles M. Rowland II dedicates his practice to defending the accused drunk driver in Fairborn, Dayton, Springfield, Kettering, Vandalia, Xenia, Miamisburg, Springboro, Huber Heights, Oakwood, Beavercreek, Centerville and throughout Ohio.  He has the credentials and the experience to win your case and has made himself the Miami Valley’s choice for DUI defense.  Contact Charles Rowland by phone at 937-318-1DUI (937-318-1384), 937-879-9542, or toll-free at 1-888-ROWLAND (888-769-5263).  For after-hours help contact our 24/7 DUI HOTLINE at 937-776-2671.  For information about Dayton DUI sent directly to your mobile device, text DaytonDUI (one word) to 50500.  Follow DaytonDUI on Twitter @DaytonDUI or Get Twitter updates via SMS by texting DaytonDUI to 40404. DaytonDUI is also available on Facebook and on the DaytonDUI channel on YouTube.  You can also email Charles Rowland at: CharlesRowland@DaytonDUI.com or write to us at 2190 Gateway Dr., Fairborn, Ohio 45324. “All I do is DUI.”

Related articles

No comments »

Posted in Breath Testing, DUI Case Law

Tags:

DaytonDUI, Defending a Breath Test Case

January 26th, 2012
Big Bad Wolf

“I’ll Huff and I’ll Puff and Blow Your House Down”

Did you know that your breathing pattern can significantly alter the concentration of alcohol on your evidential breath test?  According to scientific research, “[t]he subject’s test manner of breathing just prior to providing breath for analysis can significantly alter the concentration of alcohol in the resulting exhalation.” (Jones, 1982, Schoknecht, 1989) as cited in Physiological Aspecs of Breath-Alcohol Measurement, Alcohol Drugs & Driving Vol. 6, No. 2, A.W. Jones.

Hyperventilation “…lowers the breath alcohol concentration by as much as 20% compared with a single moderate inhalation and forced exhalation used as control tests.” Id. (Jones, 1982).  Whereas, “holding breath for a short time (20 seconds) before exhalation increases the alcohol concentration in exhaled air by 15%. Id. (Jones, 1982).

With Ohio’s adoption of the Intoxilyzer 8000 breath test machine, attorneys should be on the look out for these types of breathing pattern defenses.  Tell your Ohio DUI lawyer if you were asked to hold your breath, blow in an unusual pattern or if the officer abruptly told you to stop blowing.  Your attorney needs to know how you blew because an operator may be looking to manipulate your breath pattern to force agreement of a first blow and  a second blow.

Charles M. Rowland II, DaytonDUI, is certified on the Intoxilyzer 8000 and has attended training on the machine wherein defenses like the breathing pattern defense and the long-blow breath test defense are explained in scientific detail.  He has been a city prosecutor and is Ohio’s only Forensic Sobriety Assessment certified attorney.  If you need to fight your DUI, contact attorney Charles M. Rowland II at 937-318-1DUI or 888-ROWLAND. “All I do is DUI Defense.”

Related articles

4 comments »

Posted in Breath Testing

Tags:

Ohio State Highway Patrol Reports A Safe Holiday Weekend

December 27th, 2011
English: PEARL HARBOR (Aug. 24, 2010) Chiefs a...

During this past holiday reporting period of Midnight, December 23 through 11:59 a.m. on December 26, eight people were killed, with one death attributed to impaired driving. This represents a nearly 43 percent decline in fatalities from last year when 14 people were killed and the lowest amount of Christmas Holiday fatalities in the past four years. In addition, Patrol OVI arrests increased more than 28 percent. For a complete statistical recap of the Patrol’s Holiday enforcement visit http://statepatrol.ohio.gov/doc/christmas_2011.pdf

Ohio is on pace to see a decline in the number of people killed on Ohio’s roadways in 2011, after experiencing a spike to 1,080 last year. Ohio experienced a record low in 2009 with 1,022 fatalities. So for this year, reports indicate 963 confirmed deaths and an additional 47 provisional unconfirmed deaths, for a total worst case scenario of 1,010 traffic deaths with five days still remaining in 2011.

DUI attorney Charles M. Rowland II dedicates his practice to defending the accused drunk driver in Fairborn, Dayton, Springfield, Kettering, Vandalia, Xenia, Miamisburg, Springboro, Huber Heights, Oakwood, Beavercreek, Centerville and throughout Ohio.  He has the credentials and the experience to win your case and has made himself the Miami Valley’s choice for DUI defense.  Contact Charles Rowland by phone at 937-318-1DUI (937-318-1384), 937-879-9542, or toll-free at 1-888-ROWLAND (888-769-5263).  For after-hours help contact our 24/7 DUI HOTLINE at 937-776-2671.  For information about Dayton DUI sent directly to your mobile device, text DaytonDUI (one word) to 50500.  Follow DaytonDUI on Twitter @DaytonDUI or Get Twitter updates via SMS by texting DaytonDUI to 40404. DaytonDUI is also available on Facebook and on the DaytonDUI channel on YouTube.  You can also email Charles Rowland at: CharlesRowland@DaytonDUI.com or write to us at 2190 Gateway Dr., Fairborn, Ohio 45324. “All I do is DUI.”

Related articles

2 comments »

Posted in Holiday Messages

Tags:

Ohio OVI: Standardized Field Sobriety Tests & Marijuana

December 1st, 2011

State v. Dixon, 2007-Ohio-5189 (Ohio Ct. App. 12th Dist. Clermont County 2007).

Cannabis is another commonly used recreational...

More and more, we are seeing law enforcement officers arrest drivers on suspicion of operating a vehicle under the influence of marijuana.  Often, an officer will request a urine test for marijuana after a defendant has blown substantially under the per se alcohol limit on a breath test machine.  This raises questions about the proper determination of probable cause.  If, for example, no alcohol was suspected how did the officer arrive deduce enough evidence to make an arrest? Were the standardized field sobriety tests administered to detect alcohol or something else?  Can the standardized field sobriety tests use in Ohio demonstrate impairment by any other drug than alcohol?

Because Ohio does not follow the Drug Recognition Expert (D.R.E.) protocol adopted in other states, the officer is left to rely on his training and experience in investigating a suspected marijuana-impaired driver.  This means that the officer will usually attempt to testify as to the defendant’s performance on the horizontal gaze nystagmus (HGN) test to support the probable cause for an arrest.  But is the HGN a proper test for marijuana?

In State v. Dixon, 2007-Ohio-5189 (Ohio Ct. App. 12th Dist. Clermont County 2007), the court addressed the issue of standardized field sobriety tests and marijuana impairment.  Relying upon the NHTSA standards, the court concluded that observations as to performance on the walk & turn test and the one-leg stand test were indicative of impairment, thus allowing those to be used against a suspected marijuana user.  The HGN test, however, is not indicative of marijuana impairment.  According to NHTSA nystagmus would not be present due to marijuana and, as such, it was plain error to admit evidence of the HGN against the defendant.

Dayton DUI attorney Charles M. Rowland II dedicates his practice to defending the accused drunk driver.  He has the credentials and the experience to win your case and has made himself the Miami Valley’s choice for DUI defense.  Contact Charles Rowland by phone at 937-318-1DUI (937-318-1384), 937-879-9542, or toll-free at 1-888-ROWLAND (888-769-5263).  For after-hours help contact our 24/7 DUI HOTLINE at 937-776-2671.  For information about Dayton DUI sent directly to your mobile device, text DaytonDUI (one word) to 50500.  Follow DaytonDUI on Twitter @DaytonDUI or Get Twitter updates via SMS by texting DaytonDUI to 40404. DaytonDUI is also available on Facebook, www.facebook.com/daytondui and on the DaytonDUI channel on YouTube.  You can also email Charles Rowland at: CharlesRowland@DaytonDUI.com or write to us at 2190 Gateway Dr., Fairborn, Ohio 45324.

Related articles

10 comments »

Posted in DUI, Drugs & Driving, Field Tests (SFSTs)

Tags:

DUI Science: Fat vs. Thin/Man vs. Woman/Young vs. Old

October 6th, 2011
Marine of the United States Marine Corps runs ...

After consuming alcohol, will a fat person or a thin person have a lower BAC?

Alcohol loves water and will move into spaces where water is the most prevalent.  Fatty portions of the body have a low water content and absorb little of the alcohol, while muscular portions of the body have a high water content and absorb much alcohol.  As it is carried to all parts of the body by the blood, the alcohol distributes itself in proportion to the water content of the various parts of the body.  It is the presumed relationship between the amount of alcohol in the blood at a given time and the amount of alcohol which will be present in the breath which is it he basis for the theory that we can test breath and infer a BAC result.

So we can conclude that the fatter the person, the more alcohol will remain in the bloodstream which will result in a higher BAC result.  The better a person’s physical fitness level, the more alcohol will be taken up by the rest of the body, the less which will be left in the blood, which results in a lower BAC.  This may upset the traditional assumption that the bigger the person (i.e. the size of the container) the more alcohol that the person can consume and the lower the BAC.  The “lean” to “fat” ratio, however, is an important factor.

Women have, on average, a higher percentage of body fat.  Older people have, on average, a higher percentage of body fat.  Does this mean that the breath tests are biased against older people and women.  Based on the science the answer is, yes!  The higher the percentage of body fat, the more alcohol will stay in the bloodstream, the higher the BAC which will result from the alcohol consumed, as opposed to the same amount consumed by a lean, muscular person of the same weight.

Is this fair?  It will be up to your experienced DUI trial counsel to make the argument that the breath test machine unfairly evaluates the inference of alcohol in your bloodstream.  Hire an OVI attorney who has the understanding of DUI science, so that he or she can make the case to the jury.  This defense is not applicable in all cases and a careful and deliberate process should be used to determine if this is a valid defense in your case.  Charles M. Rowland II was the first attorney in the United States to earn a Forensic Sobriety Assessment certification and the only attorney in Ohio to hold such a distinction.  He has been trained in the same manner as law enforcement officers to administer and evaluate the standardized field sobriety tests as devised by the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration and he holds certification on both the BAC DataMaster and Intoxilyzer 8000 breath test machines.  If you want an attorney who has the experience to represent you and an attorney who limits his practice to the defense of the drunk driver, contact Charles M. Rowland II at (937)318-1DUI [318-1384] or 1-888-ROWLAND [888-769-5263] today.

Related articles

4 comments »

Posted in Blood & Urine Tests, Breath Testing, Field Tests (SFSTs)

Tags: